The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles on the facts charged of this case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment on the following grounds.

1) Although the Defendant intended to have sexual intercourse with the victim, the Defendant was aged 69 years old and suffering from urology, which is a part of the disease, as well as was under the influence of alcohol at the time, and thus, did not reach the maturity. 2) It is difficult to view that the victim was in a state of difficulty in resisting or resisting due to mental disability at the time of committing the instant crime, and there was no fact that the Defendant did not recognize the victim’s mental disability and did not intend to have sexual intercourse by using the victim’s mental disability in a state of difficulty in resisting or resisting the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, and one hundred and twenty hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court determined that the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim by inserting his sexual organ into the victim’s sexual organ according to the evidence in the original judgment. 2) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is just and acceptable, and there is no error as alleged by the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal doctrine is without merit.

① Until the investigation agency and the court below, the victim made a relatively consistent and detailed statement with the content that the defendant inserted his sexual organ into the victim’s sexual organ. Even if considering the victim’s mental disorder, the victim answer questions as to whether the victim’s sexual organ was inserted into the victim’s sexual organ.